PEMBELAJARAN INKUIRI MODEL ALBERTA UNTUK MENINGKATKAN KEMAMPUAN BERPIKIR KREATIF MATEMATIS SISWA SMP
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research is motivated by the results of previous studies which showed that the mathematical creative thinking abilities of students are still not as expected. This study focuses on the effort to determine the increase in mathematical creative thinking abilities of students as a result of the inquiry learning model of Alberta. This study is an experimental study with the entire population of one junior high school students in the city. Samples were students of class VII school. The study sample as many as 73 students, 36 students in grade 37 student experiments and the control class. Based on the analysis of data obtained conclusions: (1) achievement of creative thinking ability of students receiving mathematical model of inquiry learning Alberta better than students who received conventional learning. (2) Improving creative thinking abilities of students receiving mathematical model of inquiry learning Alberta better than students who received conventional learning. (3) there are differences in improvement of mathematical creative thinking abilities by category KAM.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it